PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - British Future MPA
View Single Post
Old 6th Apr 2011, 15:52
  #146 (permalink)  
WillDAQ
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bristol
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
it isn't specially efficient, (Boeing will soon launch its replacement) based on a jetliner optimized for cruising at 38k ft, giving room to easily 20-30 crew members and still room left. It has redundancy typical for 2 engined aircraft, it needs big runways, can't refuel anything, can't fly slow, I haven't seen the big radar or option to engage small moving targets.
Redundancy of twin engined ETOPS aircraft... i'd be amazed if you can get your new design contra-rotating turboshafts to match the reliability of an already well developed ETOPS aircraft. As for the rest, big is relative, refueling isn't needed and why are you assuming it's the only asset in theater than needs to be able to do everything?

WillDAQ, a smaller, flexible, multirole platform costing 30-40% less to purchase and half to operate could easily have a 25 yr market of 300-400 IMO. The total costs of ownership would be significant lower then introducing a heritage platform.
So here's my problem, the production numbers are dream land simply because it's not built by an American company, so all the allies who buy American to strengthen trade links aren't going to buy it. As a European project you might sell 100 ish maybe?

Even allowing for 400 units. You're never going to win against an aircraft based an existing civilian design. The airframe requirements for MPA are not much beyond 'truck' and there are plenty of cheap trucks already available as a starting point.

Much of the technology / systems could be used from the A400M, CN295 MPA, A350 The only novelty on the design would be open rotors providing 25% better fuel efficiency then todays smaller turbofans and superior low level, low speed performance.
Indeed, but it would be cheaper to use them in an A400M, CN295 or A350 rather than spending billions going after a fuel saving. Fuel is cheap, new aircraft types aren't. In terms of flight envelope i'd be interested to see how far beyond the capabilities of A400M you're planning to go, I suspect that's an aircraft already capable of being thrown around a MAD circle if so desired.

Alternatively the A400M's TP400 could offer a proven alternative.
They certainly do... in an A400M.

Remember, we're after the 80% solution here because the last 20% of requirements will vary over time and we have no money in the first place!
WillDAQ is offline